↓ Skip to main content

Short versus standard duration oral antibiotic therapy for acute urinary tract infection in children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
2 policy sources

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Short versus standard duration oral antibiotic therapy for acute urinary tract infection in children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2003
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003966
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mini Michael, Elisabeth M Hodson, Jonathan C Craig, Sarah Martin, Virginia A Moyer

Abstract

The optimal duration of oral antibiotic therapy for urinary tract infection (UTI) in children has not been determined. A number of studies have compared single dose therapy to standard therapy for UTI, with mixed results. A course of antibiotics longer than a single dose but shorter than the usual 7-10 days might decrease the relapse rate and still provide some of the benefits of a shortened course of antibiotics. The objective of this review was to assess the benefits and harms of short-course (2-4 days) compared to standard duration (7-14 days) oral antibiotic treatment for acute UTI in children. We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2002) MEDLINE (1966 - September 2002) and EMBASE (1988 -September 2002) without language restriction. Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing short-term (2-4 days) with standard (7-14 days) oral antibiotic therapy were selected if they studied children aged three months to 18 years with culture proven UTI. Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and the results expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Ten trials were identified in which 652 children with lower tract UTI were evaluated. There was no significant difference in the frequency of positive urine cultures between the short (2-4 days) and standard duration oral antibiotic therapy (7-14 days) for UTI in children at 0-10 days after treatment (eight studies: RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.76) and at one to 15 months after treatment (10 studies: RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.70 to 1.29). There was no significant difference between short and standard duration therapy in the development of resistant organisms in UTI at the end of treatment (one study: RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.01) or in recurrent UTI (three studies: RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.29). A 2-4 day course of oral antibiotics appears to be as effective as 7-14 days in eradicating lower tract UTI in children.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 82 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 19%
Student > Master 13 15%
Researcher 13 15%
Other 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 17 20%
Unknown 15 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 18 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 October 2018.
All research outputs
#988,958
of 13,715,693 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,008
of 10,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,076
of 347,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#73
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,715,693 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,724 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,517 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 210 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.